Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

93 views

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Molecular Molecular dynamics simmulation studies on liquid shear viscosityDynamics Simmulation Studies on Liquid Shear Viscosit
- Navier Stokes Equation
- PDE - Most Important
- pde
- AE114 Class 7 February 16, 2015 Without Images
- A12
- Adaptive Fem
- Canuto
- The Pipeline Transportation of Heavy Oils Using Water Based Dispersions
- Some topics in theory of 2nd order elliptic PDE
- Theory of Injection Molding
- Agitator LATEST
- module 6
- beam Design
- 1980_Rouillard_The Viscosity Of Mollasses.pdf
- Charges and Fields
- ASTM D1243-95-R00 Dilute Solution Viscosity of Vinyl Chloride Polymers
- 2015
- oscillatory shear test method
- E-03.0) General Static-Mixing Customer Specification Questionnaire

You are on page 1of 83

November 6, 2011

(E) 1 3 3 3 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 15 17 19 20 21 27 29

1 (H0 )

Contents

Contents 1 Linear & Nonlinear Static NSE 1.1 Physical properties remarks . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Derivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Shear ow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 Steady-state Stokes - Overview . . . . . . . 1.5 Steady-Stokes - Variational form . . . . . . 1.6 W k,p , H k , H 1 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.7 The Auxiliary space E() . . . . . . . . . . 1.8 Extension map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9 Trace and Stokes formula . . . . . . . . . . . 1.10 Preliminaries for Stokes Equation Existence 1.11 Leray projection operator . . . . . . . . . . . 1.12 Existence for Stokes Equation . . . . . . . . 1.13 Energy approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.14 Energy Method proof. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.15 Existence for Inhomogeous Stokes . . . . . . 1.16 Regularity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.17 Navier-Stokes Existence . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.18 Existence - Galerkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CONTENTS 1.19 1.20 1.21 1.22 1.23 Variational Form for Inhomogeneous Navier-Stokes Uniqueness for Inhomogeneous Navier-Stokes . . . . Inhomogeneous NS Uniqueness . . . . . . . . . . . . Lemmas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Regularity for NSE for n = 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2 32 33 34 38 43 55 55 56 59 62 66 66 78

2 Evolution NSE 2.1 Stokes operator . . . 2.2 Function spaces . . . 2.3 Galerkin . . . . . . . 2.4 Pass to limits . . . . 2.5 Uniqueness . . . . . 2.6 Stability Properties 2.7 Uniqueness . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

Denn nichts ist fur den Menschen als Menschen etwas wert, was er nicht mit Leidenschaft tun kann.

Overview of NSE

1.1

These equations establish that changes in momentum (acceleration) of uid particles are simply the product of changes in pressure and dissipative viscous forces (similar to friction) acting inside the uid. These viscous forces originate in molecular interactions and dictate how sticky (viscous) a uid is. Thus, the Navier-Stokes equations are a dynamical statement of the balance of forces acting at any given region of the uid.

1.2

Derivation

F = Fint =

viscosity - 0 in ideal uid

(ij ) = =

1 3

normalize

p 0 0 0 p 0 +T 0 0 p

tensor; material dependent

1 (pI3 ) + 3

gravity

stress tensor

u u + y y

where is proportional to viscosity, which varies with temperature. For u = (u1 , u2 , u3 ) and p constant, ut + u u = pI3 + (u + (u)T ) ??? u

incompressibility

=0

Calculating, (u + (u)T ) or = ui + uj xi xj ui uj + xj xj xi

take transpose div = 0 uid incompressible (NSE)

ut + u u + p = u.

This is formally a coupled system in four unknowns (u1 , u2 , u3 ), p and 2 eqns, and is therefore determinable. To uncouple, write (?) Difculty: p is presumably a

function of 4 variables, but my eqn doesnt tell me; this makes p difcult to handle.For uid have boundary conds., but for p initial condition

p = div (u )u

elliptic eqn

1.3

Shear ow

An element of solid has a preferred shape, to which it relaxes when the external forces on it are withdrawn (whereas a uid does not). Looking at a rectangular element ABCD, under the action of a shear force F , the element assumes the shape ABC D . If the solid is per-

Figure 1.2: Deformation of solid (top) and uid elements (bottom) fectly elastic it goes back to its preferred shape ABCD when F is withdrawn.

In contrast a uid deforms continuously under the action of a shear force (however small). Thus the element of the uid ABCD conned between parallel plates deforms to shapes such as ABC D and ABC D as long as the force F is maintained on the upper place.

First measure the normal force that is exerted on the plate. From this we can determine pressure p: u measure area A, the strain rate F= A u y to determine experimentally

This constant is to be determined

y

du dy

1.4

u

t=0 =

u0 , u0 = 0. In NSE (or just Stokes) the following boundary conditions are commonplace:

u = 0 no slip boundary - uid will have zero velocity relative to the boundary.

u=0 or ( u) v = 0

vorticity - here no tang. component

A. Steady-State Stokes

u + p = 0 u=0 u = 0

drop t. p is harmonic,so p can be wild on boundary we have this from h o l o m o r p h i c functions

B. Evolution Stokes

ut u + p = 0 u=0 u t=0 = u0 , u = 0

C. Steady NSE

u u u + p = 0 u=0 u = 0

1.5

Compare this to Lax-Milgram-type arguments for elliptic eqns. In fact, NS is almost elliptic:

but have this termso we must nd a different solution space.

u

2nd order function with divergent form

=0

u,

where Cc

+ p, = 0

u + p, = 0,

Leibnitz rule

div (p) p ( )

trace=0

so

u,

p, = 0

V = Cc () div = 0 .

Reverse direction:

u, = 0 V

or min u

2

uV .

The space V = Cc () div = 0 ) is not a complete Vector Space ! ! ! We need to complete this So how will we do this? depends 1 on the space we want to close, i.e. H0 , L2 .

Monday, August 29

Function spaces

Once we have the variational formulation of u + p = 0 in u = 0 on we have to set up the corresponding function space. The usual Sobolev space is decient because it requires information about u, whereas here only u is known. In the following, we consider only vector elds that are divergence-free.

1.6

W k,p, H k , H 1 2

The Inner Product (, ) and the Pairing ,

(u, v) we can use the L2 inner product for two functions. u, v use for those arguments that arent functions, for example (u, v) . W k,p . Dene W k,p () = f Lp () D df Lp () k, k 0, 1 p f where W k,p (),

W k,p W k,p

=

k

D f

p Lp

1 p

is a Banach space.

Density theorem

We denote the space C () as the space of smooth functions up to the boundary. For p = 2, 1 p < , this space is dense in W k,p (). k,p Note that Cc W k,p = W0 and u = D u = 0 k 1 on . ?

H and V

1 For u Cc (), u = 0 H0 L2 , dene H = {u Cc u = 0}. This space is not closed. After mollifying, dene

10

1 V = u Cc () u = 0 = H0 Here u H0 and u = 0 preserve their denitions. H = u Cc u = 0 and p H 1 () = L2 Here we have uk = Cc and u L2 uk Cc and uk = 0.

What is u = 0 here? In this space, u is = 0, remember though we are taking distributional derivatives. Since u = 0, can we talk about u . If u is a L2 function whose distributional derivative is zero, then do we have enough information? No: If only u L2 , then the boundary cant be dened. We have partial information with u . This expression is well dened when u H 1 2 ()

1.7

u

distributional divergence

Dene the auxiliary space E() = u L2 () Then H 1 E() L2 . Dene (u, v)E() = and u

E()

L2 () .

u + (div u)(div v)

(u, u)E() .

Note that (E(), )E() is Hilbert (check). Density theorem for E(). Assume C 0,1 . Then

Cc ()

this function is onto but still not 1-1: 1 ker 0 = H0 () = whole space

is dense in E().

11

Proof. (. . . ) (see s.31) Trace theorem for E() . A trace theorem allows us to dene u for u E(). To do this, we ask where the trace operator lives. The denition 0 H 1 () L2 ()

has the deciency that not every L2 function can be the trace of a H 1 function: this mapping is not onto. Replace this denition with 0 H 1 () H 2 () Dene H s (Rn ) f + Consider

1 f (x) H 2 (Rn1 ) = f (x, (x)) = Rn1 R 1

f L2 = f Rn R

1+

s 2

f L2 .

D 2 . cant dene fractional derivatives pointwise. use fourier transform this is for at case. not if domain is nonat. If have Lipschitz graph = (x, (x) )

Lipschitz

x Rn1

where f H (). locally Lipschitz Use Partition of unity and dene globally.

1 2

1.8

Extension map

1

Dene H 2 () H 1 (). Find f F by solving F = 0 F = f. The solution of this Laplace equation gives F , the denition of the extension map F . Note that f and F are reciprocals of each other: F

H1 n

c f =

H2

0 = id

12

1.9

1

For C 1,1 there exists a linear continuous operator E() H 2 () require the (stronger) C 1,1 regularity here and 1 1 dual space. H 2 () = H 2 () Furthermore the following hold: 1. u = u u C 1 ().

u restrict normal component

div (u) + u u = (u ) .

0 restrict

3. ker( ) = E0 () and

E0 () = Cc ()E()

For Sobolev spaces we had that the whole component on the boundary was zero; here, we have no information about the tangent component, just the normal component. For the function u the normal component is well dened, but grad u is not. Dx1 , Dx2 , . . . are not dened.

which I need for the matrix representing the tangential components.

13

Friday, September 2

1.10 Preliminaries for Stokes Equation Existence

L2 () = H H1 H2 where H = u L2 () div u = 0, = 0

normal trace

Hodge Decomposition

H1 = u L2 () u = grad p, p H 1 (), p = 0

1 H2 = u L2 () u = grad p, p H0 ()

well dened, p E()

Stokes theorem can be relaxed, 1 only the gradient need be in H0 with the space E().

(1.1) (1.2)

(u, v) = (

q)

1 well dened, q H0

+ (div p, q)

= (0 (p), 0 q)

0 Eq 1.2

=0

1 4. Let u L2 () and p H0 solves

14

p = div u in p = 0 on By Lax-Milgram, there exists a solution. div (p u) = 0 u = (up) + p Claim: The term p u is divergence-free but perhaps not trace free ( 0). To see this, write

div -free

u p E()

(up) H 1 2 ()

well-dened

Let q H 1 solve q = 0 q = (u p) where must satisfy (u p), 1 = 0 (1.3) (1.4) div (up) (the

=0

above equation is solvable up to a constant. We write u H 1 R to denote this (modulo the constant). Apply Lax-Milgram to solve (1.3,4) . Thus

H 1

Note: When applying LaxMilgram with Neumann BC you have to be careful (?)

u = u p q + q + p

H H2

15

1.11

P L2 () H

remember L2 () = H H 2

which has the apriori estimate Du L2 u L2 where u u p q. The Projection operator is used to interpret Stokes: u + p = f in div u = 0 in u = 0 on . Apply op on both sides of the equation:

L2

Pu + P(p) = P f

H 2 L2

Pu is Stokes operator, denoted by A. Later: Mild solutions Kato, Giga, Fujita, (cf. Du Hamel form, where we use P to kill pressure p). Avantage: P eliminates the pressure term p. Disadvantage:

or

Au = f

1.12

Rn is bounded Lipschitz

CHAPTER 1. LINEAR & NONLINEAR STATIC NSE Use Leray projection operator to make p drop out: u + p, v = f, v

int. by parts

16

v V

1 1 V = u H0 (), div u = 0 H0

2 V

u v

= (u, u)V .

We look for u V that satises (u, v)V = (f , v) v V where f V and f H 1 . This implies (u + f, v) = 0 v V.

D () L2

+ f = p

H 1

for some p D ()

Summarize:

Fact u V solves (u, v)V = (f, v) for f V if and only if u + p = f in div u = 0 in u = 0 on for some p L2

V is read in the dual V

17

1.13

Energy approach

2

cf. Laplace Energy functional: Dene the Energy functional E(u) = u V 2(f , u). 2 1 The variational problem u V solves (u, v)V = (f, v) for v V . is u = f 2 u f , where we minimize the functional over equivalent to

1 H0 ; Here we minimize over V .

bilinear form is (A) bounded (B) Coersive so we can apply LaxMilgram

18

Wednesday, September 7

Existence Regularity

1 in V H0 1 in V H0

There exists a unique u V and unique p L2 () R solving homogeneous system with estimate u

V

+ p

L2 R

H 1

u, v V. uV vV

2 V

boundedness coersivity

a(u, v) u

Poincaire

for some p D

p L2 p + f + u H 1

19

1.14

2

The energy functional E is given by E(u) = u L (f , v) v V . Claim u V solves (*) if and only if E(u) = minvV E(v). We know the minimization is always obtained. Pf. (u, v)L2 = (f , v) v V . Let v = u w where w V. Then (u, u)L2 = (f , u) (f , w) + (u, w)L2 Using that

cs

u 2

2 L2

w 2

2 L2

(u, u)L2 = (f , u) (fw) + (u, w)L2 2 (f , u) (f , w) + u L2 + w 2 2 1 2 E(u) = u L2 (fu) 2 2 1 2 w L2 (f , w) = E(v) 2 2 0= d E(u + tv) = 2(u, v)L2 2(f, v). dt

2 L2

(1.5)

20

f constant L2 () R means (f, 1)L2 = f 1 = f = 0

1.15

u p = f in divu = g in u = on .

divergence theorem

g=

u=

H1

+ p

L2

H 1

+ g

L2

+ f

H2

1 Remember: A function f H0 2 div f L

The approach for the inhomogeneous is cook up new function that is divergence-free and has zero trace. Note that f changes.

onto

1 The divergence operator H0 () L2 () f = 0 Dene the restriction operator 0 H 1 () H 1 2 () u0 H 1 such that 0 (u0 ) = . rst extend it Because of the Compatibility Condition, g

(div u0 g ) = g

Compatibility Condition

g=0

Somehow, u0 , u1 kills g.

CHAPTER 1. LINEAR & NONLINEAR STATIC NSE Trace 0 (V ) = 0 (u) 0 (u0 ) 0 (u1 ) = = 0. The Eq (IS) in v becomes v = p = (u u0 u1 ) + p = f + ( u0 + u1 ) = f

H 1 H 1 H 1

21

onto

1 H0 ()

L2 ()

f =0

(1.6)

Not 1-1: add divergence-free function and we still have = f (no uniqueness). The term p: The gradient operator L2 () H 1 After taking slash out constants so we can have f + c = f . out constants, this space is 1-1. Adjoint: , g = f, g

integrate by parts

(1.7)

1.16

Regularity

If Rn is bounded and C m+2 and u W2, , p W 1, , 1 < < +. For u W2, , u is pointwise dened and p is well dened If addi- strong solution instead of weak 1 solution. tionally f Wm, , g Wm+1 , and () W m+2 (), u Wm+2, (), p W m+1,

22

Wm+2,

Wm+1, Wm+1

Wm,

+ g

Wm+2 ()

+ u

L2

Question: Why do we have u W2, ? Ans: If f W,1 ?? Theorem 3 If f L2 , g H 1 , H 3 2 , then u W2,2 p W 1,2 .

Why? Suppose g = = 0 for the moment and = 0 u + p = f u=0 u=0 For this eq 1.16, which has only two terms on the lhs, f L2 u L2 then automatically p W 1, . We must show, using nite quotients, that (u, v) = (f , v) Approach: Use the nite dierence quotient as test function, but have to cut out.

()

u(x+he)u(x) H1 use u h uniformly with respect to h. D2 u L2 .

(1.8)

23

Friday, September 9

regularity for n = 2.

Theorem 4 (regularity for n = 2) 1 For f Wm, , g W m+1, , Wm+2 , (), C m+2 and g = Remember that (B) and (C) be then u + p = f in divu = g in (B) u = on (C) has unique solution (modulo constant) such that u Wm+2, , p Wm+1, and

1

Wm+2,

+ p

W m+1, Wm+

1

W m,

+ g

Wm+2 ,

+ u

L2

Approach: We nd auxillary equationto kill (B),(C). In particular: nd gradient potential kill pressure p get formally biharmonic eq coupled 2nd order (like 2nd order Elliptic equation) for which Sobolev W k,p theory holds. Claim v Wm+2, such that divv = g in v = on (Prove later) If Claim 1 holds, then w = u v where w satises ( )

w + p = f + v = f divw =0 w =0

24

Case 1: is 1-connected

divw = 0 can nd can nd extr in 1-form that is closed dW = 0. 1 homotopy cohomology is exact translated such that = , x2 x1 Condition (B)

mixed derivatives cancel

1 f

rst component of the vector f

2 D2 (D2 ) + D12 p = D21 f 2 D1 (D1 ) + D p = D12 f 21

2 (D2

2 + D1 )

W m1,

(1.9)

Note that 1.9, an equation in does not involve p. Further, it is a rst order dierential operator lost 1-order regularity. dV = 0 =0 tangent derivative =0 normal derivative on

For the second order operator need a second condition; this problem as it stands is not closed tangent gradient = 0

Note that the potential is constant, but because is not unique, pick = 0 on u = f Wm,2 u=0 u Wm+2,2

Using nite quotients and integrate by parts, get 2 more derivative estimate. This is possible = 2 For u Wm+2, , Calderon-Zygmund theory of

harmonic analysis does this for higher order .

25

Figure 1.4: Diculty: cannot shrink closed paths to 0. The 1-cohomology of the domain is like copies H 1 () = Zk have k freedoms cannot not specify constants ci 2 u = f u Wm+2, u =0 Wm1+4, w Wm+2, From p

pW m+1,

= + W m, . f

Case 2: is k-connected

Suppose 2-connected for simplicity. We cut k (here: 2) times to make 1-connected

k . R such 1ik

26

Figure 1.5: is dened except on cut. For to be welldened there too extend make well-dened trace For the Multi-Connected case, equation same as in single connected case. The biharmonic equation is uniquely solable; but the dirichlet + neumann boundary conditions are dicult ? Rest of argument is exactly same.

For x

+ = + (x0 ) + d.

Proofs of Case 1

Omitted. (see p7,8 handcopy)

27

Wednesday, September 14

For the Navier-Stokes Equations we introduction the nonlinear advection term u u, i.e. the advection operator is

u=u

+v +w . x y z

Picture advection as transport of salt dumped in a river. If the river is originally fresh water and is owing quickly, the predominant form of transport of the salt in the water will be advective, as the water ow itself would transport the salt. If the river were not owing, the salt would simply disperse outwards from its source in a diusive manner, which is not advection. Very few exact solutions of NSE are known in closed form. In general, exact solutions are possible only when the nonlinear terms vanish identically.

1.17

Navier-Stokes Existence

(N S)

u + u u p = f in divu = 0 in u = 0 on .

L2

Variation form: ((u, v)) + B[u, u, v] = (f, v) v V B[u, vw] = u v w bigger space

2n L n2

u, v V, w V

bounded

We to to extend to the

Ln

V = V.

1 Note that V H0 take closure instead of the space 1 H0 Ln

28

1 H0 Ln

= u

1 H0

+ u

Ln

1 for n = 2, H0 Ln = V .

ho Sobolev embedding

L2

L2

V

1 H0

replaces

with Ln

c(n) u

1 H0

V =V

2n 1 but in general H0 Ln V n2 n 2 n 2 n 4 In particular, B V V V R is well dened for 2 n 4; for m 5, V V B is not well-dened. We need to understand trilinear form better; It can induce bilinear form B[u, v] V V R replace Lemma

with V

df skew symmetry in last two vars.

u v v = ui i v

2 2

ui i v j v j i uj v2 =0 2

ibp

0

29

0

= 0.

1.18

Existence - Galerkin

((u, v)) + B[u, u, v] = (fv) v V .

replace with V . Let {wk }k=1 be an orthonormal basis (ONB) of L2 () 2 is innite-dimensional vector space cut o nite like The space L n have family of solutions if we can prove apriori estimate, we can R take limit function can solve the limiting equation done. Let X m = span {w1 , . . . , wm } m 1 and let um = m am wi coeff tb determined i=1 i

((um , wj )) + B[um , um , wj ] = (f , wj ) 1 j m

1 N O T E: ONB L2 , but H0

choose wj to be basis

am + Aj am am = (f , wj ) j il i l

We ask if we can solve the term Aj am am , being nonlinear. Formally, this il i l term is not like solving Ax = B, but rather like solving Ax + BxxT = C; does solution exist maybe equal number of equations solution maybe not unique though nonlinear terms. Therefore we need to turn to the following

Theorem 5 (Brouwer) If f BR BR is continuous x0 BR such that f (x0 ) = x0 , where BR are closed balls.

30

Figure 1.7: and P () Proof (contradiction) If f (x) x x Bn F (x) = f (x)x BR ; F BR BR . F (x) = x if x B F is a continuous map and wi is xed on the boundary F BR = Id impossible by degree theorems x = 0 on in BR , but boundary is of degree 1. innite-d versions of Browder Lemma (Variation of the Brouwer Fixpoint Theorem) Let X be a nite-dimensional Hilbert space equipt with inner product [, ] and norm []; P X X is continuous (but not necessarily linear). Suppose [P ()] = k > 0 X with []k such that P () = 0. Proof If p() 0 BR = X [] k , then dene Q() = k and [Q()] = k. Now Q BR BR continuously and Brouwer 0 BR such that Q(0 ) = 0 where automatically Q(x0 ) is on the boundary and [Q(0 ), 0 ] = k. p() [p()] BR

thm very useful for existence of nonlinear pde.

31

= [k

which is impossible because 90degree Dene Pm (u) X m X m by [Pm (u), v] = ((u, v)) + B[u, u, v] (f , v). Need to verify: B[(), ] > 0. ((u, u)) (f , u) = u2 f V

f

= u

u f

>0

if u V = k where m > VV um X m with um V < k such that f pm (um ) = equivalent to am + Aj am am = (f , wj ). In fact um V VV . j il i l Since[pm (um ), um ] um um

V 2 V

(fum ) um

2 V

= (fum ) f

um

which gives the sought after apriori estimate with uniform bound (so that we can now take limits).

Challange

Write down Lax-Milgram proof using a Galerkin method approach

32

Friday, September 16

Variational Form for Inhomogeneous Navier-Stokes Uniqueness for Inhomogeneous Navier-Stokes

1.19

We show that the variational form for inhomogeous Navier-Stokes is well posed. Dene the eigenfunction {X m } of Stokes operator having zero Dirichlet m boundary conditions X m = span {wi }i=1 . Find u V such that ((u, v)) + B[u, u, v]

uuvwell dened for vV

= (f , v) v V , f V

skew-symm in last two vars

= (f , v) v X m

(1.10) where X m V

((um , um )) = (f , um ) um

Send m .

V 1

This is called an apriori estimate lhs holds for all sequences um , & rhs is independent of the number m.

By weak compactness properties of V , bounded sequence take subsequence so sequence converges weakly:

in V um u in V.

um

u in L2

Rellich compactness um u in L2

v X m ,

33

((um , v)) ((u, v)), (f , v) (f , v) vacuously B[um , um , v] B[u, u, v] The last of these 1.11 is not obvious. Write

skew-sym tensor

(1.11)

B[um , um , v] =

um um v = B[um , v, um ] =

um um v

L1 L

so that =

not for V yet

Note: we dont want solution & test function to vary at the same time: x solution and send test function ; x test function & send solution . we have, then, that For all v V there exists vm X m so that vm v V .

1.20

2 c(n) f

V

!u V

Brouwer FPT is great for nonlinear you can have many xpoints; LM is only for 1 xpoint.

0 skew-symm

34

u

L2

the solution is unique in a ball ? Suppose u1 , u2 unique solutions. Let w = u1 u2 . Then (ui , vi ) + B[ui , ui , v] = (f , v) replace v with w (w, v) + B[u1 , u1 , v] Note that (u1 u1 u2 u2 ) = (u1 u2 )u2 + u2 (u1 u2 ) v = wu1 v u2 wv (u, v) + B[w, u, v] + B[u2 , w, v] = 0.

0

2 2

w u w

V

=

switch

v u w w

L4 L4 L2

Sobolev

c(4) w 2 .

Use u

c(n) f

c(4) f

<0

2 2

0.

1.21

Inhomogeneous NS Uniqueness

f H 1 , nd u H 1 such that

not u V not 0 on .

For Rn bounded, C 2 , ()

u + u u + p = f in u = 0 in u = on .

35

Curl

i curl = ( ) = det

x 1

j

y 2

k

z 3

vanishes

n 4, = ( 1 , . . . , n ),

j,k n

aijk Dj k

j,k=1

We want curl H 1 Ln . Theorem 7 at least one u H 1 and p D () solving 1.21, H 1 Ln such that div = 0 and = on Proof. Let u = u for u=0 u = 0 on In terms of u =f

solve this gives variational form

( + ) + ( + ) ( + ) + p u u u

linear rst order

+ u + + u + p = f + + u u u

difcult quadratic terms f

B[, , ] are difcult but can control

1 f Verify that H 1 . Suppose H0 . Then

36

, =

well-dened

L2

Ln

1 H0

Ln

L2

1 H0

H 1 .

37

Monday, September 19

coersivity

For u p + u u = f divu = 0 u= Suppose H 2 Ln satises div = 0, where = f + H 1 . f The corresponding weak form is = 0 on , u = u + +p = f u

(( , v)) + B[ , u, v] + B[ , , v] + B[, u, v] = (, v) v V u u u f We need the coersivity estimate for LM: For > 0 (( , u)) + B[ , u, u] + B[ , , u] + B[, u, u] u u u u 2 ((u, u)) + B[ , , u] u . u It suces to show that B[ , , u] u 2 u . 2

2

Sobolev embedding

B[ , , u] = B[ , u, ] = u u

u D u u

L n2

2n

D u

L2

L2

c(n) u

Ln

38

1.22

Lemmas

Ln

2

c(n) u

Ln

How: We introduce the function = curl indirectly: we can cut potential, but cant cut curl:

not here

cannot chop o

= curl

cut here

If we cut , the divergence-free condition breaks down! Additionally H 2 W 1,n L and = curl ; H 2 H 1 2 .

bounded

curl () Ln + Ln , c + Ln (2 ) Ln (2 ) Lemma 1 Let (x) = dist (x, ) > 0 there exists C 2 () such that 2 = 1 if (x) = 0 if (x) , = exp 1 (x) if (x)

39

from Proof Dene = (x) . If C 2 0 = 0 () > 0 2 ( ) differential geometry such that C 2 t t 2 Let = log t t 2 Then ? (x) = ((x)); = ((x))(x) by chain rule. 0 t Why is 1? Since

((x)) (x) ((x)) . (x)

So (?) f +

Ln Ln

curl (2 )

Ln

We need to estimate n . Be careful: is small near by use L Poincaire inequality near the boundary (Poincaire inequality with weight)

v2

2

c1

1 v H0

!

This is like a Poincaire inequality with weight. Cf: v2 c1 (v2 )

B Br

0 0

2

v2 c {} 2

40

We want to estimate

For

v2 . {}

{>}

1 2

v2

Rn

f g =

0 {g=t}

f dH n1 dt

where f L1 , g Lip .

Like a curvilinear Fubini For level surfaces For good Lipschitz surfaces, this is just Fubini; for curvilinear its Federer.

Then

41

v2 = {}

ibp

1 t2

{=t}

v2 d dt =

0

0 {=t}

v2 d d 1 2

1 t

0

1 t

v2

=t

1d t dt

=t

v2 dt =

v2 +

1 t

=t

v v d dt

ho - 2

0

1 t

v

=t

v

1 2

dt

0 =t 2

1 2

=2

1 t2

v ddt

=t

v ddt

1 2

v2 2 2

v2 2

1 2

= { }.

42

Wednesday, September 21

regularity estimate

(Last time) v2 c v

1 v H0 .

(x) = 1 x

v2

B1

1 x

B1

lhs =

1 0

1 (1 r)

2 Br

v2 d dr

2

2

u u

L2

L2

uw

L2

= u ui j

boundary data has curl extension; cut o interior part: = curl ( ) H 2 W 1,n L and Use to cut o u + u

L2

L2

43

Figure 1.9: the bump function set = x (x) . This is the tubular neightborhood . Has support in annular region; has support near boundary. u

max est

L2 ( )

+ u

L2 ( )

: we restrict on = exp 1 ; L2 .

Use

u

1 2

+ u

L2 ( ) 1 1 n + 2n

n2

2n L n2

Ln ( )

Ln ( )

Ln ( )

Now we can make the coecient as small as possible by absolute continuity: lim0 Ln ( ) = 0.

1.23

n=2 n=3 n = 4 critical - papers n = 5 supercritical - this dimension is the heart of the matter n = 6 solved n = 7 open problem

44

n=2

1 We begin with minimum regularity: u H0 . Assume f = 0.

u u = (u u)

sob emb (crit dim)

1 u H0 () u Lq for some q < +

u uj xj =

xj

uj u

uj u xj 0 divu=0.

as long as nite

u u u Lq

q < +

(Lq ) W 1,q

q =

q q1

Last time, if u + p W 1,q add 2nd order regularity u W1,q , p Lq q. Now go back: u u = (u u) product Lq

Lp Lp

u W2,q

p W 1,q .

Go back: (u u) = u 2 u + u u

Lq

W 1,q

45

n = 3.

u L2 u u L3 2

6 2

W 1,2 embedding

Not L2 lol

u + p L3 2

n=4

Previous argument gets stuck: W 1,2 (R4 ) uW

2, 4 3

L2

pW

1, 4 3

This is good because we have one more derivative. Its bad because we now have lower integrability (!): u W 1, 3 (R4 )

4

L2

stop!

Idea for n = 4

Consider instead Burgers equation (ignore pressure p):

L2

u = u u 2 u = (u u) cancel 1 derivative u = (u u) u u u u

Sobolev emb

2 2 2 4

= u

2 4

c u

2 4

(1.12)

Note that the integrability does not improve, but the power in 1.12 does

CHAPTER 1. LINEAR & NONLINEAR STATIC NSE Theorem 8 Any solution u L4 (R4 ) of u = (u u) is zero u Then 1c u is not true.

L4 (R4 ) L4 (R4 )

46

c u

2 L4 (R4 ) .

L4 (R4 )

1 c

47

Monday, October 3

Lemma 4 For all m R if f H m,2 (B) & u

B

H m+2

c f

Hm

+ u

H m+2 2 ,2

(B)

[From last time - needs to be proved]. For m = 1, m Z Lemma has been known via Solonikhovs theorem. For m = 2, by interpolation, it sucies to prove the lemma for m Z .

If two integers true, then between two integers also true

use standard interpolation.

k If k > 0, H k = H0 Lq Lp1 Lp2

f f

Lp1 Lp2

c f

Lq

m = and =

m

m0 m < 0.

Sobolev space

u H m 2 ,2 (B), B u d = 0 u H m 2 (B)

1

m m<

u,

(S)

=0

1 2 1 2

1

= H m 2 (S) . . . . so

CHAPTER 1. LINEAR & NONLINEAR STATIC NSE For any m , ! v m such that v + p = 0 v =0 v B = . To prove above, m = k, k Z. We want to estimate v Decompose: v = v1 + s where s satises () We know s

H m,2 (B) H k (B)

48

rk

s

s

=0 on B.

In order for this to be solvable, the average on the boundary must be 0. We know that by Lax-Milgram (?)

(S)

=0

is compatible

v1 That is, v1

H k (B)

H k (B)

H k (B)

sup

f H k (B)

v1 , f

H k (B)

k Let 0 f H0 (B). Let v k+2 solve

49

B

H k+2 (B)

c f

H k (B)

ibp

v1 ,

v1 v ,v 1

v1 , v

+ v1 , q p,

0

v

0 div p,v pdivv

H k

= sup = 1.

k f H0 f 0

v1 ,

k H0

Continuing, v

1 H m+ 2 (B)

v1

H k 2 (B)

v

1

H k+2 (B)

H k 2

+ s

H k 2 (B)

f Using

k H0 (B)

H m (B)

H m 2 (B)

s =? s =

I can talk about trace if I loose

1 2 H m 2 (B)

1

50

derivatives.

c f

k H0 (B)

H m 2 (B)

H m 2 (B)

S m Z m is an isomorphism V.

v + p = 0 v =0 v=

m (B) .

interpolate true for all whole numbers. duality interpolate negative numbers. Using conclusion,

v + p = 0 v =0 v B = u

H 1 (B).

Global integrability/ dierentiablity

51

1 Need to prove for 0 < < 2 ,

v v

2 L2 (B) 2 L2 (B )

c4 v c4 v

2 L2 (B) 2 L2 (B) .

This estimate is not obvious, because of p term: Let v = v B u Then average on boundary still

8 L 3 (B)

= vu

3 2 (B)

uu

Poincaire H 1 (B)

L2 (B)

L2 (B)

L2 (B)

C u

L2 (B) .

p is harmonic we can control L2 norm, control all high order derivatives of harmonic fnction inside

q By embedding

H m,2 (B)

c u

L2 (B) .

k+1 p

k+2 v

L (B)

L (B)

c u

L2 (B)

52

Sunday, October 28

3d regularity For n = 3, f L (0, T ; H), f L1 (0, T ; H), u0 H 2 V .

If

trouble term

u=0

assume smooth, carry out argument

u u u + p + (u u) = f t d dt

u + 2 2

u + 2B[u , u, u ] = 2 f , u 2 f B[u , u , u ] u

4 2 4 2 L2

L2

L2

,

2 L2

L2

C u

L2

2 u 4

1 4

poincaire 2

3 4

2 2

d u dt

L

2 2

+ 2 c u

if 0 then ok.

u L2

2 f

L2

L2

If the term is not 0, we impose condition on the initial data: c u0 2 > positive. When we turn on evolution the term c u 2

CHAPTER 1. LINEAR & NONLINEAR STATIC NSE grows, so it could become negative. We estimate: u (u u + p + u u) = f u, u

2 L2

53

Call d1 = f (0) d2 = f

L L2

+ c0 u0

H2

+ c0 u 0

1 2

2 H2

,

2 L2

d2 + 2 u0 d3 = d4 = d2 + 1 + d2 1

T d2 + u0

2 L2

d1 T d2 exp

T 0

f (s)

L2

3 c2

can make true for either large coecient or small data. Clearly d3 d4 u(0)

2 L2

d3 d4 <

3 c2 .

We can show that, even at max time T . Choose T near zero such that 0 < T < T and such that c u(t) 0. We show that T can be extended all the way to T .

L2

>

d u dt d 1 + u dt 1 + u

2 L2 t 0

add

2 L2

2 f

L2

L2

L2

2 L2

1 + u

2 L2

exp

f (s)

ds 0 L2

CHAPTER 1. LINEAR & NONLINEAR STATIC NSE Then 1 + u (t) and u d4 c u geq0. Contradiction cannot stop.

Need to prove that next time L L2 .

2 L2

54

1 + d2 exp 1

T 0

f (s)

L2

ds

Wednesday, October 5

We study Evolution NSE on

bounded domain entire space

((u, v)) = Du Dv u =

u, v V ,

((u, u))

inclusion map

H compact linear

H V

1 (V ) (H0 ) = H 1 .

2.1

Stokes operator

The space u V can be viewed as an element in the dual as follows: identify use Riesz v is a bounded linear functional on V , so by RRT another element, Reprentation Theorem 55

56

V ,V

1 For u H0 , A is if drop the divergence-free condtion. Then

Au v

Du Dv u, v V.

u t

u + p = f .

Stokes

[[u, v]] =

can dene

(uv + Du Dv)

V ,V

2.2

Function spaces

For 1 +,

b

L (a,b;X)<

1 < + = +

dont forget - the spatial variation X is Banach, i.e. it has the inner product X .

C(a, b; X) = f

57

atb

C(a,b;X) X

- cannot discount measure zero set (!) -Compare with norm having ess sup not dened everywhere, so we can discount. Lemma. Let X Banach space with dual X and u, g L1 (a, b; X). Following are equiv: 1. u a.e. integrable equal to primative function of g u(t) = +

t

g(s) ds

0

b a

u(t) (t) dt =

g(t)(t) dt

a

3.

d dt

-If (i) (iii) hold, u is a.e. equal to a continuous function from [a, b] X after mollifying. Proof

(i) (ii) Easy to see (iii) (ii). For all D((a, b)), true in sense of distributions:

b a

u, (t) dt =

g, (t) dt

a

b a

must =0

b a

(ii) (i). Suppose g 0. need to prove that u(t) = + g(s) = constant. Then

gone

58

u = 0.

Let 0 D((a, b)) be such that the mass a 0 (t) dt = 1. Then

b a b

)(t) dt = 0.

compact support/smooth

t a

((t) 0 ( )) d

Use (ii).

b a b a

b a

u(t)((t) dt) =

(t) dt

b a

u(t)0 (t) dx

0 = constant

b a (t) dt

b a

u( ) (t) dt = 0

=0 t

u(t) = 0 a.e.

b a

(u v0 ) (t) dt = 0

u v0 =

so v0 = g(t).

If f L1 (a, b; X) satises

b a

Since, actually the spatial variation is the Banach space X, he replaces R with X.

then

59

Friday, October 7

H 1

For u L2 (0, t; V )

u ( 0, T ; V ), then

like L2

u C([0, T ], H) d 2 u = u(t), u (t) V,V L1 (0, T ) dt 2 u (t) W 1,1 (0, T ) C([0, T ]) Stokes system ut u + p =f u = 0 has two cond: u = 0 = u0 u0 = 0 u0 = 0

match initial data. cannot talk a priori about trace. But with regularity above we can. Question: for f L2 (0, T ; V ) , u0 H are given, we seek u L2 (0, T ; V ) such that

compatibility condition

v V

2.3

Galerkin

solve using limiting process adjust nonlinearity to look more linear. Let {wi }i=1 be complete (but not orthogonal) base of V & orthonormal base in H.

for i j

Vm = span {wi }i=1

60

m .

1 H0 inner product

not fm

tail disappears.

project m

i=1

(u0 , wi )wi

gim (t) wi , wj

orthon. m j=1

m j=1

Fj (t) = f , wj and

gim (t) =

m j=1

lim

d dt

X + AX = B(t) X(0) = X0 Note: We do not need to use Brouwer xpoint here, because we have time. time is actually nice right?

take limit: Clearly {um } L2 (0, T ; Vm ).

61

how to take limit? Use compactness. Compactness introduces some form of control (trapped in a ball) - use apriori estimate.

d d 2 um = 2 um , um dt dt

d (um , uj ) dt

d = (um , dt uj )

d d dum d 1 2 um = um , um = um , um = , wj dt 2 dt dt dt Using that 2ab a2 + 1 b2 , d 1 2 um + ((um , um )) = f , um dt 2 d 2 2 schwarz 1 2 2 um + 2 um f + um V dt V t 1 t 2 2 2 um (t) + f V d m um ( ) d 0 0 T 1 t 2 2 2 f V d sup um H (t) + um ( ) d um + 0 0 0 0tT so (or where) Then um

pass limit.

2 L (0,T ;H) 1 um L L2 L2 Hx t x t

Lax-Hopf condition

+ um

2 L2 (0,T ;V )

u0 H +

t 0

f (t)

2 V

dt

cf Heat equation.

62

Monday, October 10

2.4 Pass to limits

in nite dimension, weak convergence & strong convergence same thing take subsequence , we may Without loss of generality v L (0, T ; H) v in L ( 0, T ; H ) & um w and w L2 (0, T ; V) such that u m in L2 (0, T ; V) B1 L is weak star compact 1 . This means:

um , v1 ,

um , um u, or

L

i.e.

um , w, L2 (0, T ; v)

um ,

Claim: v = w.

Note for T < +, L2 (0, T ; V ) L1 (0, T ; H). If I pick an element in the smaller test space, then L2 = L1 - they are the same. Remember that we can cook up a sequence having 2 dierent limits in dierent spaces, for example sin but sin x n x n 0 in L2

where is the Dirac mass in the Radon measure space M([0, 1]).

1

The weak star topolgy is by denition, the weakest one that makes all functionals x x, x

continuous

pass to limit:

d dt um , wi

63

+ ((

um

, wi ) ) = f , wi .

f ,wi

L2 uwi

The term

is converges: d wm , wi w, wi . dt

If function convergent Distribution also convergent. Moreover, the distribution converges in the distributional derivative sense d d fi f dt dt Shift test function to see it converges: d d f = f . dt dt Then the sequence um is convergent, 0 um = 0

Then

m i=0

gim (0)wi u0

in H.

d (u, wi ) + ((u, wi )) = f , wi dt

d (u, v) + ((u, wi )) = f , wi for all v V. dt v satises the equation in the distributional sense and the boundary value u=0 is kosher because of the yellow boxed explanation above.

initial-time condition holds:

64

u t = 0 = u0 Show: has well-dened limit in L2 -sp. u C([0, 1], H) H-norm as function of t has well-dened limit. pf Using d = u dt

2

u in

= 2 u , u

V ,V

read in V , V duel

Once prove this then prove that L2 norm in X-var is continuous in t-var. Notice that

2 u , u

V ,V

L1 (0, T )

2

2 2

2 2

as t t0

u(t) u(t0 ) 0 The last convergence holds because u u(t0 ) < u(t0 ) 2 u(t), u(t0 ) 0

2

u(t) +

0tT

sup u(t) +

T 0

um

dt

u0 +

T 0

f (t)

2 V

dt

lower semi-continuity

65

Lower semicontinuity

weaker than continuity A function f is upper (lower) semi-continuous at a point x0 if, roughly speaking, the function values for arguments near x0 are either close to f (x0 ) or less than f (x0 ). A lower semi-continuous function. The solid red dot indicates f (x0 ) In particular, f is lower semi-continuous at x0 if for every > 0 there exists a neighborhood U of x0 such that f (x) f (x0 ) for all x U . Equivalently, this can be expressed as

xx0

A function is lower semi-continuous i x X f (x) > is an open set for every R. A function is continuous at x0 i it is upper and lower semicontinuous there.

Stability implies uniqueness. Like Heat equation: instead of laplace operator its Stokes operator.

Prove:

d dt

66

u = 2 u , u

V ,V

C (0, T ) L2 C (0, T ; V ) L2 (0, T ; V )dense C (0, T ; V ) L2 (0, T ; V )dense. In fact, mollication in t-var um = u {vm } C such that vm u in L2 (0, T ; V ) and Use Hlder o 2 u , vm u , u m using that

d dt

dense in L2

vm u

in L2 (0, T ; V ) in L1 (0, T )

vm

d dt

u .

2.5 2.6

67

Wednesday, October 12

68

Wednesday, October 14

69

Wednesday, October 17

70

use Fourier transform

Wednesday, October 19

L2 . Then there exists

u=

u

u t [0, T ] 0 otherwise

g

extension generates

Then g L2 .

71

u( )

2 X1

d < +

f

just numbers - bounded 2 u( ) 2 X1

2 L2

L1

g (t)

2 X1

+ u(0)

2 X1

+ u( )

2 X1

bounded

cannot integrate; derivatives in L2 , but this term not L2 so sacrice derivatives 2(1 + 2 ) 1 + 2(1) We need to estimate

2

+ 2(1 + 2 )

2 X1 2 X1

2 X1

< 2 + 2.

u(t)

2 X1

d

split

1 + 2 u( ) R 1 + ( 2 )1 1 1 + 2(1)

1

u( )

d +

2 u R 1 + 2(1)

X1

parseval: R u 2 X1

1 2 g R 1 + 2(1)

1

2 X1

+C

R

g ( )

C (1) R 1+

singularity at but0

1 2(1)

L2

d < if <

1 2

compactness follows.

Theorem. For n 4, f L2 ([0, T ]; V ), u0 H, there exists at least one solution u L2 (0, T ; V ), u L2 (0, T ; V ) such that Error. Actually, this is L1 ; see t u u + u u + p = f

nonlinear

below

u=0 u(0) = u0

recall Trilinear form B[ u , v , w ] = (u v) w

72 u, v, w V is

B[u, v] V R. B[u] = B[u, u] NS can be reformulated into

L10 3

L2

L10 3

ut Au + Bu = f

V H 1 V V

where it follows that ut V (after looking at where other terms are). Note that V is integrable in t.

Then the regularity of u is improved: u

(0, T ; H), by

V

f L2 (0, T ; V ),

Bu

2 V

, Bu

= B[u, u]

sup C u u

u

V

is L1 integrable.

not continuous. u C([0, T ; Hweak]. weak continuous can still take weak limit. For all H, u(t), C([0, T ]). nonlinear terms are trouble; take care of Bu , being nonlinear (because T T 2 of square): 0 Bu V 0 u V .

{wi }i=1 , Vm = span {w1 , , . . . , wm }, Solve

d dt (um , wj ) +

((um , wj ))

Dirichlet inner product

truncate initial data: um (0) = projVm (u0 ) = u0m , where u0m = m (u0 , wi )wi i=1

73

nonlin. ODE:

m i=1 (wi , wj )

gim (t) +

m i=1

((wi , wj ))g(t) +

m i=1,

where the term is nondegenerate because it forms a base. nonsingular. (wi , wj )1i, jm GL(m).

invert: gim + m ij gjm (t) + m ijk gjm gkm = m ij f , wj where j=1 j,k=1 j=1 ij , ij , ijk R.

nonlinear, cannot solve globally (like X = X 2 .) can solve locally; Fixpoint, X = F (t, X).

fm > 0 & gim (0, fm ) R If tm is the maximum value then gim (t) as tm ; however,

=0

here have cancelation, so even though the equation is nonlinear, the estimate we have is still linear (!)

d 2 um + 2 um dt

um

2 V

1 f

2 V

orthon. proj

74

um (t) +

bounded

T 0

um ( )

2 V

1 dt um (0) +

2

t 0

f (t)

2 V

dt u0 +

t 0

f ( )

2 V

75

Friday, October 21

Galerkin - nish convergence uniqueness for m = 2. Leray-Hopf solution for n = 3 regularity.

Suppose u L (0, T ; H) L2 (0, T ; V ) solves ut u + u u + p = 0 u=0 u t=0 = u0 . and suppose (mult by u, integrate) u(t) + 2

T 0 R3

R3

u dxdt

R3

u0 .

um :

um +

This says:

T 0 R3

um u0 +

f

0

2 V

um

L (0,T ;H)

+ um

(0,T ;V )

C.

um , where

u in L (0, T ; H)

u = fm where fm = f Aum m L2 (0,T ;V )

76 Bum

B[um ,um ]V 2

In fact, B[um , um ] V :

Sobolev

Bum

sup

wV =1 B[um ,um ,w]

= sup

w

V =1

u um w um

R

2 2,

T V

dt

0 um

2 2

dt C. Upshot:

fm L1 (0, T ; V ).

have better control of derivatives,., so um u

in L2 (0, T ; H).

u m where we used um um w um

R 4

L1 (0,T ;V )

um

C um

2 2

= C um

.

apply Albin-Lions, with V H V

Then um u in L2 (0, T ; H)

dum dt , wj

+ ((um , wj )) + B[um , um , wj ] =

((um ,wj ))

f , wj

constantconverge

It suces to show

um wj uwj (without wj strong convergence.)

77

um wj uwj

= (um u)wj

wj

um u

initial data for approx solution pass to limit (will not repeat; see previous Notes).

The existence argument is due to Lions. Leray gives a dierent E. Hopf < Lions < Leray method; Schwartzs distribution was not yet invented.

Lerays idea: ut + u u u + p = f u=0 Mollify the term to u , then equation is linear (Stokes equationwith rst order term). vt + u v v + p = f v =0 so that u u v = T (u).

nd apriori est of T ; build up function space in C 2 T is contraction map on suitable function space u = T (u). ut + u u u + p = f varies and for each xed have v; send 0.

78

2.7

Uniqueness

2 u

1 2 1 2

Lemma 5 For n = 2, R2 , u

L4

L2

L2

1 u H0

Ladyzhenskaya inequality

1 in 2 dimension, H0 is H 1 (R2 )

Lp

p < +

Proof. Extend by Nirenberg higher dimension. Lemma 6 (better estimate on trilinear form) B[u, v, w] 2u

1 2

1 2

v w

1 2

1 2

when can

L2 (0,T ;V ) .

2 be obtained (idk)

subtract

79

2 2 2

replace

by u1 , equality

0

B[u, u1 , u] C u 4 u 4 u1 so d 2 u +2 u dt

2

C u u u1

2 u

+C u

u1

d 2 u c u1 dt d c t u1 (t)2 e 0 dt

0 0

c 0t u1

2

dt u0 2

u0 2

0

=0

B[u, u, v] = B[u, v, u] u u u

2

1 2

2 2 2 V

u

2 2

1 2

v

T

2 2

1 2

u

2 2

1 2

u

T 0

B[u, u]

2 L (0,T ;L2 ) T 0

u

0

2 2

dt.

80

Monday, October 24

proof of Ladyzhenskaya inequality existence theorem 3d version

Lemma 7 (n=2) u

L4

2u

1 2

L2

1 2

L2

1 u H0 .

even splitting

!

3 4

Lemma 8 (n=3)

L4

1 4

L2

L2

1 u H0

L2 (R2 )

2=

21 211

prove for smooth compact support functions pass limit (which we can do because dense).

holder

L2

c (u )

2

L1

= c 2 u u c L6

1 2

1 2

can interpolate: L2 < L4 < L6 how interpolate:

in 3d, is embedding in L6 .

1 1 1 = + = . 4 2 6 4

1 4 3 4

interpolation inequality

L4

L2

Sobolev inequality

L6

c u

1 4

L2

3 4

L2

W 2,2 (R3 )

L6

expand int

2 x2 (u )(x, ) d

81

smooth fc w compact spt; ending pt at is 0 because compact spt

= 2

+ x2

u(x, ) d u(x, ) x2

u(x, ) D2 u(x, ) d

u(, x2 ) D1 u(, x2 ) d.

R R

R R

4 2

R2

u (x1 , x2 )

2

R2 2

D2 u

1 2

R2

u2

R2

D1 u + D2 u

Theorem 10 If n = 3 the solution we obtained via Galerkin method to the NSE satises u L (0, T ; H) L2 (0, T ; V )

uL

8 3

(0, T ; L4 ())

2

8 3

3 4

3 2

=2+

3 6

u L

4 3

(0, T ; V )(0, T ; V )

!

8 3 0 T

2 3

1 Proof For a.e. t [0, T ] we have u(t) H0 . By the 3d interpolation inequality/ Sobolev inequality we have

1 4 3 4

u(t)

L4

u(t)

L2

L2

8 3 L4

1 4

L2

u L2

3 4

L2

u L2 dt

usually cant split, but this is L1 s

82

L (0,T ;H)

2 L2 (0,T ;V )

L8 3 (0,T ;L4 )

L (0,T ;H)

3 4 L2 (0,T ;V )

proof u = We claim

+ Bu +

f

L2 (0,T ;V )

If this is true, then we can write u L2 (0, T ; V )+L4 3 (0, T ; V ) L4 3 (0, T ; V )

L2 (0,T ;V ) Bu L4 3 (0, T ; V ).

u L4 u uv

1 2 4 L2

L4

L4

L4

3 2 L2

u so

3 42 L2

L2

1 2 L2

Bu B(t) V

1 4 L2

3 2 L2

L4 3 , u

1 2 ; L2 (0,T ;L2 )

L4 3 (0,T )

L (0,T ;L2 )

This is the regularity we have; but this regularity we dont know f unique;

If try to extend 2d proof you will nd we need more If n = 3 and u satises in addition the following

There is a gap between L3 L8 .

8

Proof follows 2d proof.

83

2

u = B[u, u, u] B[u, u2 , u] B[ u , u , u2 ]

0 L4 L2 7 4 L2 L4

int

u(t)

8

L4

4 L2 u2 4

1 4

L2

u2

4 4

3 4

+1=

7 4

Using ab a 7 + 1 b8 where = 2 u

7 4 8 7

L2

u(t) d dt

+ u2 L2 u +

2

1 2

8 L4

2

2

u + u(t)

8 L2

2

2 L2

u2

8 L4

u2

u

L4

u(t)

1 u

t 0

dg = c(t) dt, g c( ) d ,

2

ln g ln g(0)

t 0 t 0

t 0

c( ) d,

g( ) g(0) exp

2

c( ) d

8

] u t (t) d 0

4

integrable

so u0 u1 = u2

- Molecular Molecular dynamics simmulation studies on liquid shear viscosityDynamics Simmulation Studies on Liquid Shear ViscositUploaded by반효동
- Navier Stokes EquationUploaded byNaveen Sapare
- PDE - Most ImportantUploaded byParvez Ahmed
- pdeUploaded byGurjeet Singh
- AE114 Class 7 February 16, 2015 Without ImagesUploaded byJaredSagaga
- A12Uploaded byjameswhite4321
- Adaptive FemUploaded byLivio German Aguilar
- CanutoUploaded byElhibari Othmane
- The Pipeline Transportation of Heavy Oils Using Water Based DispersionsUploaded byJoann Howard
- Some topics in theory of 2nd order elliptic PDEUploaded byAgus Leonardi
- Theory of Injection MoldingUploaded byfkaram1965
- Agitator LATESTUploaded byHARIPRASAD
- module 6Uploaded bynaefmubarak
- beam DesignUploaded byrssaini77
- 1980_Rouillard_The Viscosity Of Mollasses.pdfUploaded byCarlos Tomey
- Charges and FieldsUploaded byDamian Boh
- ASTM D1243-95-R00 Dilute Solution Viscosity of Vinyl Chloride PolymersUploaded byArturo A Puentes Zegarra
- 2015Uploaded bySubramoniam Ayyappan
- oscillatory shear test methodUploaded byshreedharkoilekar
- E-03.0) General Static-Mixing Customer Specification QuestionnaireUploaded byWladimir Antonio Egurrola Romero
- M.E PresentationUploaded byRakesh Babu
- Chemical AdmixturesUploaded bymoizm53
- AERSYS-7001Uploaded byantonellodelre
- Ch.6 Shearing Stresses in Beams and Thin-Walled Members 29s ---Dr.rafi'-1 Mechanical Engg..pdfUploaded byHassan W. Zubair
- SECTION 3Uploaded byAduchelab Adamsonuniversity
- ajnsp.2015.7.15.pdfUploaded byshreedharkoilekar
- Physical PropertiesUploaded byRajshekhar Chatterjee
- Rion VT-03F_04F-E.pdfUploaded byHafsah Fatimah

- Linear Algebra - Friedberg; Insel; Spence [4th E]Uploaded byLuis Roberto Ríos
- PHY 242 Lab 2 Function Generator and Oscope WORKSHEET (2)Uploaded byMichael Raba
- Exam I Practice Key (Recovered) (1)Uploaded byMichael Raba
- ma322F16Quiz4Uploaded byMichael Raba
- Mathematics Comprehensive Exams University of KentuckyUploaded byMichael Raba
- An epsilon of room Pages from year three of a mathematical blogUploaded byPiratereader
- Struwe Partial RegularityUploaded byMichael Raba

- FSC Part 2 SolutionsUploaded byKhyzer Hayyat
- AcousticsUploaded byAnusha Ivaturi
- CE 382 L8 - Influence Line Diagrams.pdfUploaded byjahid
- do scope and seq alg 2 cpUploaded byapi-233720080
- Annotated Bibliography on Tm 140301Uploaded byPuneet Kaura
- Migration Evaluation of Silver Nanoparticles From Antimicrobial EdibleUploaded byEunice J. Figueroa
- 1-s2.0-S1359645410001308-mainUploaded byPourya Noury
- Carlo Mgcl2 Determination of the Electronic and Structural Configuration of Coordination Compounds by Synchrotron-radiation TechniquesCCR_111854_organomet_SR_ASAPUploaded byEero Iiskola
- Control in Cells-STPMUploaded byjennie
- STRUCTURAL PACKING RECENT ADVANCEMENT AND ITS APPLICATIONUploaded byup4all
- CA - 2Uploaded bybalaguru78
- Lecture 08Uploaded bymaga2000
- Introduction to AlkanesUploaded byJasminSutkovic
- Lab3_ LINEAR CONV.docxUploaded byegaupc2123
- T2000_UKrev4 (1)Uploaded byServicii Curatenie Chisinau
- Exact Differential EquationsUploaded byWASEEM_AKHTER
- kom 2-Marks-All-5-Units.docxUploaded byKesava Prasad
- Rotating SphereUploaded byRenata Lobos
- DESMI - RO-MOP - Oleophilic Oil Mop SkimmersUploaded byRoco Octavio Ríos Villa
- Lect Slides 1Uploaded byMahadev
- Hydrothermal Synthesis of Perovskite Bismuth Ferrite CrystallitesUploaded byTahsin Morshed
- CM61-Installation-Guide.pdfUploaded byjosep sampol
- Experiment 4 AtqUploaded byCamille Grefaldia
- Specifications for Design of Hot Metal Ladles AISE Standard No.Uploaded bySebastián Díaz Constanzo
- Boundary Element Formulation for the ClassicalUploaded byPaulo Cavalcante
- soln_hw2Uploaded byHashim Gurmani
- Experiment 2 Cmt555Uploaded byDIey ChokiEy
- New Composite Material Low Cost Underground Water Tanks 2006Uploaded byCoevic
- EPA 523.pdfUploaded byAnonymous GdWMlV46bU
- 42794259 Heat Transfer SummaryUploaded byanastasios